MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE (some more ports)
David Naylor
naylor.b.david at gmail.com
Tue May 26 16:16:40 UTC 2009
On Tuesday 26 May 2009 10:48:25 Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> David Naylor píše v út 26. 05. 2009 v 08:19 +0200:
> > pav: ${_MAKE_JOBS:C/-j//} won't work with DISABLE_MAKE_JOBS (or
> > MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE) since it needs to always be a positive number, secondly
> > it still cannot be used for conditional code (since it is defined in the
> > post section, but the whole code could always be moved to the pre
> > section).
>
> I'm hesitant to modify bsd.port.mk for benefit of just four ports.
> Also, I think having MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER set to 1 when the feature is in
> fact disable, is counter-intuitive (because -j1 is very different to no
> -j at all).
I understand, I see the light. By the way it is two ports requiring the
below.
What about the change that exposes MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER when MAKE_JOBS_SAFE or
FORCE_MAKE_JOBS are defined (to avoid using ${_MAKE_JOBS:C/-j//}, not sure
what the policy is of ports using *.mk internals). I think that is a
reasonable change???
> So how about just having
>
> .if defined(DISABLE_MAKE_JOBS)
> MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER= 1
> .else
+.if !defined(MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER)
> MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER!= echo `${SYSCTL} -n kern.smp.cpus`
+.endif
> .endif
>
> in ooo makefile?
This will work in OOo2*, the OOo3 will also need a check for DISABLE_MAKE_JOBS
since they rely on MKAE_JOBS_NUMBER always being set (just the way they do
things).
Will fix and send another patch.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20090526/b478377f/attachment.pgp
More information about the freebsd-ports
mailing list